Economic Analysis of the Costs of Hospital Stay of Patients with Infection as a Complication of Total Replacements - Part 2: Total Hip Arthroplasty
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The study aims to quantify the costs of a hospital stay of patients with periprosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty throughout the period of treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS The group included patients who have been treated at our department for infection as a complication of total hip replacement since 1 January 2011, who have been provided with treatment (including complications) exclusively at the departments of Nemocnice Ceske Budejovice, a.s. and whose treatment can be considered completed in 2019.
The patients were included in the study regardless of the type of infection and method of treatment. The group consisted of 36 patients (16 men and 20 women).
There were 3 cases of early postoperative infection, 14 cases of late postoperative infection and 19 cases of hematogenous infection. The group includes 8 patients treated by a one-stage reimplantation, 19 patients managed by a two-stage reimplantation, 6 patients treated by a revision surgery with implant retention, and 3 patients in whom only the implant removal was possible.
In selected patients, all the reported points for all the hospital stays and costs incurred on a separately charged material were ascertained and the final sum was compared with the reimbursement obtained by the hospital in the DRG system valid for the respective year of treatment. The total costs were analysed and also an analysis by type of infection and method of treatment was carried out.
RESULTS The average costs of managing infection as a complication of total hip arthroplasty at our department amounted to CZK 320 065 (CZK 56 995 - CZK 953 614), the reimbursement in respect of the monitored cases in the DRG system equalled CZK 220 503 (CZK 89 149 - CZK 589 974). The aforementioned suggests that the average loss per treated patient is CZK 99 562 (CZK + 63 372 - CZK-428 499).
DISCUSION Care associated with infections as a complication of total hip arthroplasty is very costly and these costs are not fully covered by the reimbursement from the health insurance companies. In the Czech Republic, these costs have not been quantified as yet, therefore it is only possible to compare the costs with international publications arriving at similar conclusions and with own monitoring of the costs of periprosthetic joint infections after total hip arthroplasty.
The most economically efficient is the one-stage replacement which, however, is not suitable for all the patients, and the two-stage reimplantation continues to be the gold standard. In our study, the most expensive was found to be the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty, in which also the highest financial loss is reported.
CONCLUSIONS Due to the very high costs of treatment for periprosthetic joint infections after total hip arthroplasty, it is necessary to exert maximum efforts to prevent periprosthetic joint infections and to consider a change in the method of financing, particularly in centres to which patients are referred from other centres in order to make this treatment economically viable.